08-08-2022 Applicant's Concurrence to Defer Hearing

Home

• Variance#4,Section 25-5-74 . Minimum Building Site Area. Please explain why you are asking for a 1-acre minimum lot size when the application represents that the smallest proposed lot is be 2.046 acres? If no specific reason, please change the request to a minimum of 2 acres. • Variance#5,Section 25-5-75. Minimum Building Site Average Width.This is another blanket waiver request, but the application does not propose an alternative number of feet for the minimum building site average width to accommodate the proposed PUD. If no alternative width is provided, the final PUD could be created with oddly shaped lots. Please provide minimum building site average widths based off the proposed design. • Variance#6,Section 23-29. Block Sizes. OK with this request. • Variance#7,Section 23-33. Min Lot Size. Please explain why you are asking for a 1- acre minimum lot size when the application represents that the smallest proposed lot is be 2.046 acres? If no specific reason, please change the request to a minimum of 2 acres. • Variance#8,Section 23-41. Minimum ROW&Pavement Widths. Is there a specific design/functional reason for the proposed 'T' cul-de-sac roadway connections from Road "A"to proposed lots 1 through 4? If so, please provide that specific information. If not, please consider using flagpole connections with reciprocal easements within the lots to satisfy the desire of the PUD to reduce roadways. • Variance#9,Section 23-45. Grades&Curves. Please confirm with the Fire Department that the proposed roadway curves/turn radii are consistent with Fire Code? If so, please provide a statement to that effect. • Variance#10,Section 23-48. Cul-De-Sacs. Please provide a more detailed justification for this design element.The current justification is just a re-stating of the purpose of a PUD. Be specific as to why a blanket waiver of this section and the alternative landscaped cul-de-sac necessary(e.g., is it an aesthetic feature? How does it fit with the surrounding rural character as stated, etc.)Additionally, it appears that there is direct roadway connection from the proposed cul-de-sac to proposed lots 5,7 &8, but no discussion of how lot 6 will be accessed. Please provide an explanation of why this individual roadway access rather than a traditional cul-de-sac with frontage along each lot. Please also confirm with the Fire Department that the proposed cul-de-sac curves/turn radii are consistent with Fire Code? • Variances#11413. OK with these requests. • Variance#14. Right-of-Way Improvement. Please provide more detailed discussion & specific examples of how the proposed ROW improvements are in keeping with the surrounding, "rural" roadway designs that you represent. 3. Finally, the application did not include sufficient discussion on how the proposed project meets the criteria for granting a PUD permit articulated in Section 25-6-10 of the Hawaii County Code. Sections of those criteria applicable to your project are outlined below: 3